I see this as a start (which should have originated with government)...not arguing your good points at all. The more we can overwhelm it the better. And for sure, the states have to have clear understanding of jurisdictional responsibilities. This start does show industry is taking the initiative to PAY for it, which they should.

This is good news. A fleet of response equipment owned and maintained by the industry is exactly what is needed. Still, government should likewise develop plans in the event any future incident overwhelms industry's ability to respond. Thanks API.

""With the well still capped, cleanup officials are moving oil cleanup vessels from the well site closer to Gulf Coast shorelines to prevent further damage on land, Zukunft said.

"All of that fleet of skimmers ... is now moving to recover this oil before it makes impact," he said.""
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why haven't we had enough equipment to defend the shorelines for the last 3 months? Shouldn't the well site vessels remain deployed there in the event of further spill?

Boomies are not worthless. They are effective to have deployed in order to corral the oil if needed and in the right conditions (low odds, granted). Their primary function however, is a warm fuzzy blanket ...
Too bad we haven't had some real leadership. If we had, we would end up with enough proven, professional equipment on hand to address any future such incident with authority, rather than having to re-invent the wheel in the middle of the crisis. And we could get that equipment on the industry's dime, esp BP. Details such as who owns it etc., can be worked out. But rather than waiting around for the industry to come up with response plans (by their nature they don't have the interests of the people in mind government does); response plans they obviously didn't have, we should at least tell them, "Here they are, now pay for it", while we have their attention. If we don't use this disaster to do so, we surely will have to share blame next time.

Thankfully that system was not tested with a heavy onslaught of oil during an incoming tide. Had that occured, it seems the oil would just go under the barges. What is needed is a lot more retrieval equipment. To be effective, it would seem that area would need a dozen or more various type skimmers and other retrieval equipment.

Deficit is the amont of money spent, less the amount of money taken in during one fiscal year.
Debt is the sum of all the deficits plus the unfunded future liabilities such as Social Security. Now you gotta remember the politicons are masters at making things so complicated that any one of them can say just about anything they want about anything they do and they'd all be right. Keeping that in mind, the total debt and future liabilities are in the 100 trillion range. You will hear some say the total debt is around 10 or less trillion, but they are not including the future liabilities in that figure.

Two heads, one snake.
But porko, be fair. Big Corp isn't the only one playing the game. Lot's of other big money being thrown around out their; foundations, associations, unions, international orgs. It's a pretty long list.

The basic failure was omitting "Get the Oil Off the Water" as #2 strategic objective. Bill Clinton figured that one out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FAVuguFMvg
Establishing that objective would have made it click in someone's mind that we have a fleet of tankers standing by and an offer of cutting edge booms which can be quickly attached to them. As it is, we turned down the Dutch consulting expertise and their equipment. How much we could have mitigated the damage is unknown, but it would have been much more than we have done with the primative and make-do equipment we have been using.

No sensible person would "blame it all on Obama". How we got here can be debated til the cows come home, and that still won't do anything to get the oil off the water. The issue at hand is the ommission of a key factor in waging a battle to PREVENT all the enviormental and economic damage we face. If we are going to learn anything from this incident, we had better learn from reality. Let's keep eyes wide open in the present so maybe we'll learn something.

Koseq is the equipment provider. I understand, but cannot verify, there are many other techniques which could be employed besides just the tanker attached sweeping booms, a combination of which would ultimatesly overcome the flow rate, thus eliminating most landfall. That would include large-pump tankers at the wellhead, which would require raw oil, not dispersed oil. They would be pumping from the surface as the raw crude came up. The sweeping boom tankers would then be working the perimeters back to the source. Smaller equipment would be deployed nearshore where necessary, and inshore harvesters would be ready if needed.
http://www.maritimejournal.com/news101/gulf-spill-raises-jones-act-issues
http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/dutch-company-glad-help-out-gulf-mexico
http://www.koseq.com/

Absolutely. Had we accepted the "fee for services" expert help, the use of dispersants would have been discouraged. Still, lots of oil is on the surface, and the modern equipment which was offered is adaptable for all consistencies of oil (fresh, weathered, or dispersed). This equipment can also collect oil hovering below the surface. Furthermore, this equipment was offered within days of the exlposion, can be flown to the site, and can quickly be fitted on the many tankers which were awaiting direction from the government which never came. And, this equipment is operable in rough sea conditions, making the two week shutdown we experienced during Alex unecessary. Even more, this same company has state of the art inshore retrieval equipment as well. All of this was rejected by our government until May 28, at which time only 8 ocean going sweeping booms were ordered. And this is just ONE of the offers.